5 ms·

Makes me wonder if people even remember that SMS is a thing. Seems to me like the most obvious solution when your communication app is temporarily unavailable.

Makes me wonder if people even remember that SMS is a thing. Seems to me like the most obvious solution when your communication app is temporarily unavailable. Instead of the annoying process to look for an alternative app, download it, sign in, add contacts… just for a few hours. Or people thought Whatsapp & Messenger were gone forever and they were looking for a long term replacement?

noahtallen 5y ago
I mean, SMS or even MMS is a terrible standard for modern chats, especially group chats. Compared to Telegram, it’s slower, has terrible multimedia support, poor UX, limits on group size, limits on character counts, etc. Not to mention security or privacy. Plus, most of the group chat apps will integrate with contacts and your phone number anyways.
- ggregoire 5y ago
  I wouldn't definitely replace WhatsApp or Telegram with SMS, but for 3 hours it did the job for me and my contacts.
approxim8ion 5y ago
SMS isn't a viable option for a lot of people. It's probably the least private or secure form of messaging available, and quite often isn't very reliable, at least in my country.. I understand when you say it is a fallback, but it's a very lousy one in my opinion.
- ggregoire 5y ago
  You raise a good point, although I doubt 70 millions of people were actually looking for a "private or secure form of messaging". They wouldn't use Facebook/WhatsApp/Messenger in the first place if it was the case.
  - approxim8ion 5y ago
    You're not wrong either. Of course, for all their signalling (pun not intended), it's not like Telegram fares much better on that front so you're probably right that security/privacy aren't the first priority. Creature comforts like group chats/stickers/GIFs, VOIP etc from the same app might be more compelling.
outworlder 5y ago
In many countries, SMS is terribly expensive. This is one of the reasons Whatsapp exploded. The other being that it ran in essentially all possible platforms, even on phones that were not "smart".

noahtallen 5y ago

I mean, SMS or even MMS is a terrible standard for modern chats, especially group chats. Compared to Telegram, it’s slower, has terrible multimedia support, poor UX, limits on group size, limits on character counts, etc. Not to mention security or privacy. Plus, most of the group chat apps will integrate with contacts and your phone number anyways.

ggregoire 5y ago
I wouldn't definitely replace WhatsApp or Telegram with SMS, but for 3 hours it did the job for me and my contacts.

approxim8ion 5y ago

SMS isn't a viable option for a lot of people. It's probably the least private or secure form of messaging available, and quite often isn't very reliable, at least in my country.. I understand when you say it is a fallback, but it's a very lousy one in my opinion.

ggregoire 5y ago
You raise a good point, although I doubt 70 millions of people were actually looking for a "private or secure form of messaging". They wouldn't use Facebook/WhatsApp/Messenger in the first place if it was the case.
- approxim8ion 5y ago
  You're not wrong either. Of course, for all their signalling (pun not intended), it's not like Telegram fares much better on that front so you're probably right that security/privacy aren't the first priority. Creature comforts like group chats/stickers/GIFs, VOIP etc from the same app might be more compelling.

outworlder 5y ago

In many countries, SMS is terribly expensive. This is one of the reasons Whatsapp exploded. The other being that it ran in essentially all possible platforms, even on phones that were not "smart".